/output-plan-workflow
Use when the user asks to create, build, generate, scaffold, or plan a new workflow. Orchestrates the full planning process including architecture, steps, prompts, evaluators, and testing strategy using specialized subagents.
$ npx -y skills add growthxai/output --skill output-plan-workflow --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/output-plan-workflow
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Use when the user asks to create, build, generate, scaffold, or plan a new workflow. Orchestrates the full planning process including architecture, steps, prompts, evaluators, and testing strategy using specialized subagents.
SKILL.md
output-plan-workflow.SKILL.mdname: output-plan-workflow
description: Use when the user asks to create, build, generate, scaffold, or plan a new workflow. Orchestrates the full planning process including architecture, steps, prompts, evaluators, and testing strategy using specialized subagents.
Your task is to generate a comprehensive Output.ai workflow implementation plan in markdown format.
The plan will be displayed to the user who can then decide what to do with it.
Please respond with only the final version of the plan.
Use the todo tool to track your progress through the plan creation process.
Plan Creation Rules
Overview
Generate detailed specifications for implementation of a new workflow.
Output Path
All plan outputs go to: `.outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md`
<process_flow>
<step number="0" name="arguments_analysis">
Step 0: Arguments Analysis
Analyze the arguments the user provided:
<substep number="0" name="arguments_analysis">
Ensure they have provided:
- workflow_description: The description of the workflow to be created
- additional_instructions: Additional instructions for the workflow
If not, ask the user for the missing information. </substep>
<substep number="1" name="pre_flight_check"> EXECUTE: Claude Skill: `output-meta-pre-flight` </substep>
</step>
<step number="1" name="context_gathering" subagent="workflow-context-fetcher">
Step 1: Context Gathering
Take the time to gather all the context you need to create a comprehensive plan.
1. Read any given files or links 2. Find any related workflows in the project 3. Read the projects documentation files
</step>
<step number="2" name="requirements_clarification">
Step 2: Requirements Clarification
Clarify scope boundaries and technical considerations by asking numbered questions as needed to ensure clear requirements before proceeding.
<clarification_areas> <scope>
- in_scope: what is included
- out_of_scope: what is excluded (optional)
</scope> <technical>
- functionality specifics
- UI/UX requirements
- integration points
</technical> <llm_provider>
- Ask which LLM provider the user wants to use (anthropic, openai, or vertex)
- Default to anthropic if the user has no preference
- All prompt files in the workflow must use the same provider unless the user explicitly requests otherwise
- Record the chosen provider so it flows through to prompt engineering (step 6) and implementation
</llm_provider> </clarification_areas>
<decision_tree> IF clarification_needed: ASK numbered_questions WAIT for_user_response ELSE: PROCEED schema_definition </decision_tree>
</step>
<step number="3" name="workflow_design" subagent="workflow-planner">
Step 3: Workflow Design
Design the workflow with clear single purpose steps and sound orchestration logic.
<thought_process>
1. Define the workflow name and description 2. What is a valid output schema for the workflow? 3. What is a valid input schema for the workflow? 4. What needs to happen to transform the input into the output? 5. What are the atomic steps that need to happen to transform the input into the output? 6. How do these steps relate to each other? 7. Are any of these steps conditional? 8. Are any of these steps already defined in the project? 9. How could these steps fail, and how should we handle them? (retry, backoff, etc.)
</thought_process>
<step_output> Output Draft Plan: to .outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md </step_output>
</step>
<step number="4" name="step_design" subagent="workflow-planner">
Step 4: Step Design
Design the individual steps called by the workflow with clear boundaries.
<thought_process> 1. What is the name and description of each step? 2. What is the input schema for each step? 3. What is the output schema for each step? 4. What external services or APIs does each step use? 5. What error handling is needed for each step? 6. What retry policies should each step have? </thought_process>
<step_output> Output Updated Plan: to .outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md </step_output>
</step>
<step number="4.5" name="evaluator_design" subagent="workflow-planner">
Step 4.5: Evaluator Design
Determine if the workflow requires quality assessment, validation, or content evaluation.
<decision_tree> IF workflow_outputs_need_quality_scoring: DESIGN evaluator functions IF workflow_has_llm_generated_content: CONSIDER content evaluation (factual accuracy, relevance, tone) IF workflow_requires_validation_with_confidence: DESIGN validation evaluators ELSE: SKIP evaluator design (note in plan: "No evaluators needed") </decision_tree>
<thought_process> 1. Does the workflow produce content that needs quality assessment? 2. Are there LLM-generated outputs that need evaluation? 3. Would the workflow benefit from confidence-scored validation? 4. What evaluation result types are appropriate (boolean/number/string)? 5. Should evaluators use simple logic or LLM-powered assessment? 6. Would offline eval testing with `@outputai/evals` be appropriate for dataset-driven verification? </thought_process>
<step_output> Output Updated Plan: to .outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md </step_output>
</step>
<step number="5" name="plan_review" subagent="workflow-quality">
Step 5: Plan Review
Review the draft plan and make any necessary changes.
<thought_process> 1. Does the plan make sense? 2. Are all the steps clear and concise? 3. Are all the dependencies identified? 4. Does the workflow follow Output SDK conventions? 5. Are error handling patterns appropriate? 6. Is the input/output schema design correct? </thought_process>
<decision_tree> IF changes_needed: UPDATE draft_plan ELSE: PROCEED to step 6 </decision_tree>
<step_output> Output Reviewed Plan: to .outputai/plans
Read more
name: output-plan-workflow description: Use when the user asks to create, build, generate, scaffold, or plan a new workflow. Orchestrates the full planning process including architecture, steps, prompts, evaluators, and testing strategy using specialized subagents.
Your task is to generate a comprehensive Output.ai workflow implementation plan in markdown format.
The plan will be displayed to the user who can then decide what to do with it.
Please respond with only the final version of the plan.
Use the todo tool to track your progress through the plan creation process.
Plan Creation Rules
Overview
Generate detailed specifications for implementation of a new workflow.
Output Path
All plan outputs go to: `.outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md`
<process_flow>
<step number="0" name="arguments_analysis">
Step 0: Arguments Analysis
Analyze the arguments the user provided:
<substep number="0" name="arguments_analysis">
Ensure they have provided:
- workflow_description: The description of the workflow to be created
- additional_instructions: Additional instructions for the workflow
If not, ask the user for the missing information. </substep>
<substep number="1" name="pre_flight_check"> EXECUTE: Claude Skill: `output-meta-pre-flight` </substep>
</step>
<step number="1" name="context_gathering" subagent="workflow-context-fetcher">
Step 1: Context Gathering
Take the time to gather all the context you need to create a comprehensive plan.
1. Read any given files or links 2. Find any related workflows in the project 3. Read the projects documentation files
</step>
<step number="2" name="requirements_clarification">
Step 2: Requirements Clarification
Clarify scope boundaries and technical considerations by asking numbered questions as needed to ensure clear requirements before proceeding.
<clarification_areas> <scope>
- in_scope: what is included
- out_of_scope: what is excluded (optional)
</scope> <technical>
- functionality specifics
- UI/UX requirements
- integration points
</technical> <llm_provider>
- Ask which LLM provider the user wants to use (anthropic, openai, or vertex)
- Default to anthropic if the user has no preference
- All prompt files in the workflow must use the same provider unless the user explicitly requests otherwise
- Record the chosen provider so it flows through to prompt engineering (step 6) and implementation
</llm_provider> </clarification_areas>
<decision_tree> IF clarification_needed: ASK numbered_questions WAIT for_user_response ELSE: PROCEED schema_definition </decision_tree>
</step>
<step number="3" name="workflow_design" subagent="workflow-planner">
Step 3: Workflow Design
Design the workflow with clear single purpose steps and sound orchestration logic.
<thought_process>
1. Define the workflow name and description 2. What is a valid output schema for the workflow? 3. What is a valid input schema for the workflow? 4. What needs to happen to transform the input into the output? 5. What are the atomic steps that need to happen to transform the input into the output? 6. How do these steps relate to each other? 7. Are any of these steps conditional? 8. Are any of these steps already defined in the project? 9. How could these steps fail, and how should we handle them? (retry, backoff, etc.)
</thought_process>
<step_output> Output Draft Plan: to .outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md </step_output>
</step>
<step number="4" name="step_design" subagent="workflow-planner">
Step 4: Step Design
Design the individual steps called by the workflow with clear boundaries.
<thought_process> 1. What is the name and description of each step? 2. What is the input schema for each step? 3. What is the output schema for each step? 4. What external services or APIs does each step use? 5. What error handling is needed for each step? 6. What retry policies should each step have? </thought_process>
<step_output> Output Updated Plan: to .outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md </step_output>
</step>
<step number="4.5" name="evaluator_design" subagent="workflow-planner">
Step 4.5: Evaluator Design
Determine if the workflow requires quality assessment, validation, or content evaluation.
<decision_tree> IF workflow_outputs_need_quality_scoring: DESIGN evaluator functions IF workflow_has_llm_generated_content: CONSIDER content evaluation (factual accuracy, relevance, tone) IF workflow_requires_validation_with_confidence: DESIGN validation evaluators ELSE: SKIP evaluator design (note in plan: "No evaluators needed") </decision_tree>
<thought_process> 1. Does the workflow produce content that needs quality assessment? 2. Are there LLM-generated outputs that need evaluation? 3. Would the workflow benefit from confidence-scored validation? 4. What evaluation result types are appropriate (boolean/number/string)? 5. Should evaluators use simple logic or LLM-powered assessment? 6. Would offline eval testing with `@outputai/evals` be appropriate for dataset-driven verification? </thought_process>
<step_output> Output Updated Plan: to .outputai/plans/YYYY_MM_DD_<workflow_name>_<task_name>/PLAN.md </step_output>
</step>
<step number="5" name="plan_review" subagent="workflow-quality">
Step 5: Plan Review
Review the draft plan and make any necessary changes.
<thought_process> 1. Does the plan make sense? 2. Are all the steps clear and concise? 3. Are all the dependencies identified? 4. Does the workflow follow Output SDK conventions? 5. Are error handling patterns appropriate? 6. Is the input/output schema design correct? </thought_process>
<decision_tree> IF changes_needed: UPDATE draft_plan ELSE: PROCEED to step 6 </decision_tree>
<step_output> Output Reviewed Plan: to .outputai/plans
The open-source TypeScript framework for building AI workflows and agents. Designed for Claude Code — describe what you want, Claude builds it, with all the best practices already in place. One framework.
Repo: growthxai/output
Other skills on output.
- /llm-output-schema-constraints
Zod schema constraints that Anthropic rejects or silently ignores when sent as structured-output tool definitions via Output.object(). Use when writing or reviewing Zod schemas passed to Output.object(), or debugging structured-output validation errors.
Open skill - /prompt-file-provider-options
Guide to the providerOptions structure in .prompt files — decision tree for where an option goes, common mistakes, per-provider quick reference, and Anthropic prompt caching. Use when writing or reviewing .prompt file frontmatter (provider, model, providerOptions,
Open skill - /validate
Run lint, build, and tests to validate changes are correct
Open skill - /output-build-workflow
Implement an Output SDK workflow from a plan document. Use when the user asks to build, implement, or code a workflow from an existing plan, or after output-plan-workflow has produced a plan and the user is ready to build.
Open skill - /output-credentials-edit
View and edit encrypted credentials in an Output.ai project. Use when adding secrets, updating API keys, verifying credential values, or retrieving a specific credential.
Open skill - /output-credentials-env-vars
Wire encrypted credentials to environment variables using the credential: convention. Use when setting up LLM provider keys (ANTHROPIC_API_KEY, OPENAI_API_KEY) or any env var that should come from encrypted credentials.
Open skill

